I love Ross, But..

[spert]

The difference between us and Geelong and Collingwood playing young players is that the experienced leaders at Geelong and Collingwood have led the way by example for the younger inexperienced players, and for the first half of this season with us, it was the total opposite. If we were still floundering way outside the eight, I would expect players like Winmar, Walsh, Johnson, Archer to have been getting more games in the seniors by now.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

There is lots of empathy with your thoughts Saintjake.

As I posted on another thread, how many more injuries will it take before Walsh gets a game?

Zac is out - a perfect position for Walsh. Freo are depleted. It is a home game. Walsh has good form at Sandy.

Walsh is the future and needs to be tried at AFL level. Blake is experienced and maybe has a bit more flexibility. He is the "safe option."

Why would Walsh get a game this week when we are battling for a spot in the 8? This is hardly the time to experiment.

ITS NOT AN EXPERIMENT! the bloke has been in the best at Sandy! I didnt see Blake in the best.
He should be selected because he damn well deserves a spot.

As you saw the game last week can you tell me where Blake and Walsh played?

No i wasnt, i was working, but I did see Walsh named in the best.. again.

Yep he played forward. Blake played back. We needed a backman to replace Zac unless Rooy went back and Walsh played forward.

Do you think you could possibly think any more "in the box" if you tried? You have so little imagination, or flexibility (to go with no guts, as you said in the other thread), it's staggering.
So, because someone played at one end of the ground last week they can only play at that end of the ground this week? That's exactly what you're implying.
If you're being serious I'm flabbergasted at that comment. I thought even you were wiser than to suggest something like that.

[matrix]

gee where does lynch play in the vfl??

and what spots has he played when in the ones's again???

shesh
well ill be
diff spots

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

No way Matrix. If Lynch was playing down back in the VFL he couldn't possibly have come in and played up forward in the AFL. He's a "backman".
And Gilbert didn't go from the backline to the forward line in the drawn GF last year and help us out up there, kicking a vital goal in the 2nd half. He had been playing down back. No way could he have gone forward.
And Fraser Gehrig couldn't possibly have gone from playing on the wing, or forward line, to coming 3rd in our B&F playing at full back and then gone forward and won two Coleman's. You've got to be off your rocker! Once you play in one position you cannot play anywhere else.
And Shane Ellen couldn't possibly have gone forward in the 1997 GF and kicked 5. He'd played basically his whole career in the backline!
No way could any of those, or the thousands of other examples, have occurred. Plugger66 is right. Again. Why do we ever question him? He is always, always right, as is the club.
We should never question either again.

[matrix]

god im a numpty
what on earth was i thinking?

think ill have to agree with most of the forum on this one, im an idiot

[elvis lives]

looks like the case for the defence rests on the argument put forward by our resident genius, the all knowing, all seeing font of football knowledge and highly witty comebacks, which could be summed up as: the coaches see and know more than we do so therefore they must be right.

please. If that is the case we may as well just shut the whole site down now. The suggestion that selection decisions cannot be questioned by fans on a fan forum because, as is patently obvious, coaches have more information and expertise, is ludicrous. Apart from the fact that we are clearly all just a bunch of morons expressing uninformed opinions anway, since when did having the most information and resources mean always making right decisions? Look at any government anywhere in the world and you'll see organisations stocked up on resources, information and experts but still capable of woeful decision making. How are footy clubs any different?

its not criticising our esteemed coach to say that he prefers a long appreticeship for young players, I think most of us could agree on that. This necessarily involves holding younger players back until they have had a few years in the system and have developed harder bodies.

is this the right strategy? well it delivers a few benefits. it gives you a very dependable, resilient group that can deliver highly consistent performances over time and no doubt has been the basis for our high winning percentage over the past 3 years.

Drawbacks? well it removes the margin for error but at the same time it reduces the possibility of uncovering new talent or ability. it also increases the risk that young players do not 'come on' so to speak in a lesser grade or lose motivation due to lack of opportunity.

Up until about 5.17pm on Sept 28 last year I would have said it was the right call. Now it is clearly the wrong call. Dependable, consistent results only get you so far. It doesn't take a genius (or if it does we could just ask plugger66) to see that last year's GF 22 + steven, armo, gamble - lenny gwilt eddy, playing at their consistent, dependable best, will not beat collingwood or geelong for that matter if they are playing anywhere near their best.

so we need to find something else. that seems clear to me. Blake is a dependable, reliable defender and is probably a slightly better option for the freo game than T Walsh. but jeepers, we know with almost 100% certainty what blake can and can't do. He will perform to expectations tonight and he will do it on GF day if we get there. Age may start to be getting the better of him though. he is the epitomy of dependable saints footy. It will probably be enough on sat, but will a slightly older and slower jason blake be enough against dawes or cloke on GF day 2011? I think the answer is almost certainly no.

Tommy Walsh may not be the answer, but then again he may. If we don't play him we will never know. that is the bottom line. he may be useless on Saturday and joffaboy can come on here on Monday and tell us all he told us so. But he may do something extraodinary and flourish at a higher level. This is not going to happen with Jason Blake.

I don't believe playing TW tonight instead of blake will be the difference between winning and losing - there is a risk though it will leave us slightly worse off to face freo. but without risk there is no reward. surely it is worth accepting the chance of a 1% drop in peformance level tonight, and that is not certain anyway, for the opportunity to discover a new talent? because if we don't discover something new, and seen, its almost certain we will not be good enough when it counts.

Bottom line is we could win 26 games straight and it will mean absolutely nothing unless we win on GF day. and we will not win on GF day unless we find something else, something new. I would rather lose to Freo this weekend to be honest, in an effort to discover the extra thing that take us to a level beyond what we are capable of now. because what we are capable of now, even at our best, just aint good enough. TW may not be enough, but we cannot be sure he wont either.

If we don't play him, we will never know.

[stinger]

looks like the case for the defence rests on the argument put forward by our resident genius, the all knowing, all seeing font of football knowledge and highly witty comebacks, which could be summed up as: the coaches see and know more than we do so therefore they must be right.

please. If that is the case we may as well just shut the whole site down now. The suggestion that selection decisions cannot be questioned by fans on a fan forum because, as is patently obvious, coaches have more information and expertise, is ludicrous. Apart from the fact that we are clearly all just a bunch of morons expressing uninformed opinions anway, since when did having the most information and resources mean always making right decisions? Look at any government anywhere in the world and you'll see organisations stocked up on resources, information and experts but still capable of woeful decision making. How are footy clubs any different?

its not criticising our esteemed coach to say that he prefers a long appreticeship for young players, I think most of us could agree on that. This necessarily involves holding younger players back until they have had a few years in the system and have developed harder bodies.

is this the right strategy? well it delivers a few benefits. it gives you a very dependable, resilient group that can deliver highly consistent performances over time and no doubt has been the basis for our high winning percentage over the past 3 years.

Drawbacks? well it removes the margin for error but at the same time it reduces the possibility of uncovering new talent or ability. it also increases the risk that young players do not 'come on' so to speak in a lesser grade or lose motivation due to lack of opportunity.

Up until about 5.17pm on Sept 28 last year I would have said it was the right call. Now it is clearly the wrong call. Dependable, consistent results only get you so far. It doesn't take a genius (or if it does we could just ask plugger66) to see that last year's GF 22 + steven, armo, gamble - lenny gwilt eddy, playing at their consistent, dependable best, will not beat collingwood or geelong for that matter if they are playing anywhere near their best.

so we need to find something else. that seems clear to me. Blake is a dependable, reliable defender and is probably a slightly better option for the freo game than T Walsh. but jeepers, we know with almost 100% certainty what blake can and can't do. He will perform to expectations on sat and he will do it on GF day if we get there. Age may start to be getting the better of him though. he is the epitomy of dependable saints footy. It will probably be enough on sat, but will a slightly older and slower jason blake be enough against dawes or cloke on GF day 2011? I think the answer is almost certainly no.

Tommy Walsh may not be the answer, but then again he may. If we don't play him we will never know. that is the bottom line. he may be useless on Saturday and joffaboy can come on here on Monday and tell us all he told us so. But he may do something extraodinary and flourish at a higher level. This is not going to happen with Jason Blake.

I don't believe playing TW tonight instead of blake will be the difference between winning and losing, but there is a risk it will leave us slightly worse off to face freo. without risk there is no reward. surely it is worth accepting the chance in a 1% drop in peformance level tonight, and that is not certain anyway, for the opportunity to discover a new talent? because if we don't discover something new, and seen, its almost certain we will not be good enough when it counts.

Bottom line is we could win 26 games straight and it will mean absolutely nothing unless we win on GF day. and we will not win on GF day unless we find something else, something new. I would rather lose to Freo this weekend to be honest, in an effort to discover the extra thing that take us to a level beyond what we are capable of now. because what we are capable of now, even at our best, just aint good enough. TW may not be enough, but we cannot be sure he wont either.

If we don't play him, we will never know.

good post

[dcstkfc]

That's a pretty good post elvis lives.

[samoht]

Bottom line is we could win 26 games straight and it will mean absolutely nothing unless we win on GF day. and we will not win on GF day unless we find something else, something new. I would rather lose to Freo this weekend to be honest, in an effort to discover the extra thing that take us to a level beyond what we are capable of now. because what we are capable of now, even at our best, just aint good enough. TW may not be enough, but we cannot be sure he wont either.

If we don't play him, we will never know.

Well said... it's all about a GF win - and anything less doesn't really measure up.
So we need to improve or at least attempt to - so we need to shake things up a bit and be prepared to take on a few risks.
Walsh is one of those risks.
Standing still = going nowhere - which could be the biggest risk of all !!!

Stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

[Leo.J]

Has anyone been to closed training session?

The fact that we don't have a stand alone reserves side we don't really get to rehearse our game plan in the 2's.

The only time it would be practised would be a in a closed session and in the senior side on game day.

Unless you've been to a closed session you won't have the missing piece of the puzzle. We don't know how well TW performs the game plan.

Maybe he still is not achieving what Ross wants of him at training?

[samoht]

Leo J

Our game plan has been worked out by the opposition to a large extent... our side needs more leg speed... and better kicking skills.

[SainterK]

There is always the chance that he may play, he is an emergency after all.

This would be much to do about nothing.

[dcstkfc]

Leo J

Our game plan has been worked out by the opposition to a large extent... our side needs more leg speed... and better kicking skills.

We've won 5 in a row and 8/10. Our losses have been to the top two sides/

We can't have been worked out that much.

Ultimately this all comes down to whether you are playing for the now or playing for the future, and I'd say when you have won 8/10 and sit 7th, you have to play for the now, the future holds too much uncertainty.

[samoht]

SainterK

It could be "much ado about nothing".. but the argument isn't simply about Walsh here - it is to do with the logic and the reasoning behind wanting to try something new (take a risk) vs standing still.

[SainterK]

It could be "much ado about nothing".. but the argument isn't simply about Walsh here - it is to do with the logic and the reasoning behind wanting to try something new (take a risk) vs standing still.

I understand where you are coming from, I just don't agree.

IMO St Kilda has actually been the complete opposite of standing still this year, they have tinkered, modified, experimented, played kids, moved guys around....

Perhaps last year people could of accused Ross of playing it safe, but not this year.

Again, just my opinion.

[Dr Spaceman]

Although I have supported this week’s selections I nonetheless acknowledge a very good post by elvis lives.

I’m a big fan of Tommy Walsh and my posts in 2010 and 2011 bear that out.

While many on here, myself included, thought the Gold Coast game would have been a good chance to give Walsh a run that obviously didn’t happen. And now we’re faced with the hard run to the finals.

In all likelihood Tommy won’t get a chance until 2012. Nonetheless I maintain that next week might provide an opportunity to have a look at him. Not necessarily based on him smashing it at Sandy on the weekend, but simply if Ross harbours any thoughts of all about utilising him in the finals.

The Pies would be an incredibly difficult first up assignment for the Irishman. But by the same token it would not be a game that anyone has marked down as a “must winâ€

[Leo.J]

Leo J

Our game plan has been worked out by the opposition to a large extent... our side needs more leg speed... and better kicking skills.

We'll have to wait and see samoht.

IMO you can't truly judge the game plan until you have been doing it well for a while.

I believe that we've been in a transition phase for a large part of the season.

I still don't think we are quite there yet.

We are playing the game plan we want to now, but it is still not as smooth as it was in 2009.

And still not as smooth as the filth, and the Cats. But we are getting there.

IMO the best game for the year was the Eagles, we beat a genuine top 4 contender.

Tonight will give us more of an insight.

We'll see how well it's travelling against the filth.

I think we'll continue to improve as the season goes on - barring injury.

[samoht]

Sainter K

It could be argued that St Kilda has reluctantly tinkered this year - due to injuries and poor form of some players.

Now is not the time to stand still - we need to keep looking for that extra bit of improvement.

Standing still right now (not prepared to try something new) would be a definite risk.

I'm not saying that the TW selection etc.. will work - but at least it'd show we're prepared to take risks to see if we can get a 1% improvement... via leg speed, tackling, kicking etc..

[joffaboy]

Sainter K

It could be argued that St Kilda has reluctantly tinkered this year - due to injuries and poor form of some players.

Now is not the time to stand still - we need to keep looking for that extra bit of improvement.

While I understand your impatience re Walsh (I would love to see him in the seniors), I would like to take issue on a couple of points.

I dont know if using the second most debutants behind Gold Coast is "reluctantly tinkering". You play players on form until you get the right combination.

In the early part of the season we played players until we got the right combo with 8 debutants in the first 8 rounds. Now many of them may well have been too physically underdone for the seniors and have sustained extended injuries.

However we have had Steven, Armo, Mac all playing regualrily in the seniors and we probably would have seen much more of Cripps and Sipposs except for injuries, thats five "kids".

Add to that good form from Polo and Gamble, thats five players not there last season and it probably would have been 7. hardly tinkering IMO.

This means that we are not "standing still" as you assert but are blooding good young players, getting career best form from two new recycles in Polo and Gamble and because of the right balance have won8 from 10 and five on the trot.

I feel your posts are slightly hyperbolic and your statements dont stand up when the facts are laid bare.

Blake is not standing still as far as team goes. He is a better back than Walsh ATM, so IMO on what I have seen from Walsh, the team would be worse off with him in the team than with Blake in the team. To me thats not standing still, but actually going backward as far as the team is concerned.

I hope and prey Tommy Walsh will be a 5-7 year player for us. But tonight I hpe and prey to beat Freo with the best side available.

[samoht]

JB

I hope and pray we don't stop looking for improvement. this year .. and duly consider TW etc.. from this point on... even Cripps if he comes good.

We definitely need to look for more improvement - the fllth has improved further and a couple of teams have gone past us (Hawks etc..).

Standing Still is our biggest risk .. because it wont get us far even if we happen to make the finals.

If you're concerned with Freo - despite all the inclusions you point to - it means we still need more improvement and so I'm not stretching things - I'm just giving an honest appraisal of where we're at.

[joffaboy]

JB

I hope and pray we don't stop looking for improvement. this year .. and duly consider TW etc.. from this point on... even Cripps if he comes good.

We definitely need to look for more improvement - the fllth has improved further and a couple of teams have gone past us (Hawks etc..).

Standing Still is our biggest risk .. because it wont get us far even if we happen to make the finals.

Fair Enough. We all want to see the young ones go well. And just from the furious debate on here we can see how hard it is to balance a team on selection night.

My problem is this. My head says that this year is a learning year, a long preseason for 2012 (after you are not top four, it is virtually impossible to win the flag) and once we are sure of the finals we should introduce a couple more young ones into the seniors to get maybe one or two finals experience.

However my heart says we still are a chance in 2011 and wants me to play the most experienced players who give us our best shot.

The problem we have is we dont know the future. In two or so months time we can look back and analyse the season, but while there is life there is hope.

Oh BTW i dont think Freo will be a pushover tonight.

[Leo.J]

... the fllth has improved further and a couple of teams have gone past us (Hawks etc..)...

The Filth have improved due to recycled players imo, and natural improvement in players that were already blooded.

And the upmost confidence in a well drilled and executed game plan.

IMO our game plan will potentially stop them, or anyone on a good day.

[SainterK]

My problem is this. My head says that this year is a learning year, a long preseason for 2012 (after you are not top four, it is virtually impossible to win the flag) and once we are sure of the finals we should introduce a couple more young ones into the seniors to get maybe one or two finals experience.

However my heart says we still are a chance in 2011 and wants me to play the most experienced players who give us our best shot.

Reality is, our hearts and heads can say whatever they like...

It appears it's the players who still want to challenge this year, that is why the Saints are making a run, and why they bothered to turn it around.

I don't believe they have given up on this year yet, why would they?

[samoht]

Leo J

Our game plan has failed in one area... forward pressure in all the 3 recent GF's.

Our biggest improvement will come once we find a way - and the right combination of quick and desperate players to harass , tackle and chase the opposition half back lines... to stop the frequent and easy rebound.

[Leo.J]

Leo J

Our game plan has failed in one area... forward pressure in all the 3 recent GF's.

Our biggest improvement will come once we find a way - and the right combination of quick players to harass , tackle and chase the opposition half back lines... to stop the frequent and easy rebound.

In the 09 GF imo it was bad kicking that cost us.

In the drawn GF it went pretty well also.

The 2nd GF not so much.

As I said I'm pretty confident it will hold up, provided we don't get anymore injuries.

Judge it from WC on wards, we'll see anyway.